Significant Context

When studying theology we are always taught to look at any statement in terms of its context ie the culture, the authority of speaker, the capabilities of the listener, the topic in question etc, etc.  And no more so than in today's constructivist mode of teaching and learning.

Following on from a recent NAACE discussion on LinkedIn, I suggested the above graphic as illustrating the inter-connectedness of three primary areas of the Curricula, the Skills & Competencies and the various Motivations that energise teacher and learner alike.  It is my firm belief that not one of these three areas can be considered in isolation but that the specific context within which the learner is placed can unite the relevant portions of each.

A well-organised ePortfolio can very effectively document all of these five areas and also show their inter-relatednesses. - As an afterthough, it is my instinctive nature to expect to see all of these five areas clearly considered within a student's ePortfolio.  A balance of all five will give the reader of an ePortfolio a clear sense of a 'well-rounded' person.

Begining with the End

or for the full title: 'Beginning with the End: Planning for ePortfolio Use' . This is the title of an intriguing post that Julius Mayo made several months ago. Intriguing in that he raises some fundamental questions, but without supplying the answers!

Quite simply, he identifies the need to think through the learning outcomes and advantages of incorporating ePortfolios into his teaching (and, for that matter, their learning).

Obviously, there are important matters to consider in relation to specific learning objectives, what tasks he will expect the students to attempt, what learning strategies they will use, what additional software or devices they might want to use, how he will assess their learning, how will one module lead on to another with some sense of continuity etc.

However, Julius also identifies the need to look further afield and consider what good this new approach will have for the benefit of the students, rather than just 'head knowledge'. And that is the purpose of this post. Before looking at the suggestions I made, perhaps you should try and list what you think are the benefits of 'ePortfolio assisted learning'?

You can see Julius' post and my hurried response here .

Accelerating Learning

I have recently come across a challenging post by Nick Heap on Accelerating Learning. Although his original document is now a few years old it is still a most challenging work which should make us all think about how learning can best be encouraged.

However, before turning to his article, I would ask you to think about what makes a good learning environment - even jot down half-a-dozen bullet points. Then go to Nick's article and read through the two pages...

Having understood his message, I wonder what you would do to change teaching and learning in your situation? Comments back would be appreciated!

Second Generation ePortfolios?

For some time now I have been getting increasingly frustrated by the large number of mainly HE institutions who are continuing to promulgate e-Portfolio theory and practice which is increasingly looking some ten years out of date. I have therefore coined the hardly original acronym of 2G eP, pleading for a second generation approach to e-Portfolios, starting afresh from first principles rather than basing ideas on outmoded thinking.

Despite all the intelligence, wisdom and experience of our noble institutions it would appear that educationists are still saying, 'Here is a tool, what can we do with it?' rather than teachers saying to the developers, 'This is what we want to do, get on and give us what we want.' Quite frankly, eFolio can provide all the facilities that an e-Portfolio should deliver but, for now, let's just explore what we do really require.

Part 2

Perhaps the most immediate requirement is for some clarity. There is presently far too much confusion about the separate functions of a VLE and an e-Portfolio. Course management, and information about assessment criteria are surely the responsibility of the institution. Where helpful to the student one might accept that a copy of assessment criteria could be held within the e-Portfolio but with a good VLE that is hardly necessary. Otherwise, the e-Portfolio should be seen as learner-owned, separate to the VLE and the implications of this need to be fully explored.

The argument has been made that the e-Portfolio is inevitably institutionally based as it is designed to meet the needs of a particular course and even a function within that course. This again is 'tool thinking' rather than 'user-thinking' or 'meeting the variety of needs of each individual'. I raise these issues in my document, first published some two years ago: 'Who's hijacking our e-Portfolios?' To sum up a seven-page article in one sentence: e-Portfolio thinking should not be defined by conventional capabilities but by modern teaching and learning theory. In this regard, a better understanding of collaboration, of peer review and the general benefits of web2.0 will begin to influence the way staff manage formative assessments and the general monitoring of student progress.

Another challenge to take-up across all academic stages is that of the FE institutions. If HE can be seen as having a silo-mentality when it comes to e-Portfolios then FE must be considered as doubly disruptive. My paper, 'A Bridge too Far?' considers the whole situation in 6th-forms and FE colleges. It has been argued that FE has a higher percentage of older teachers and lecturers – this may be marginally true but is still no excuse for the serious lack of CPD supported in FE.

The beauty of eFolio is that different views can be presented concurrently to different audiences - and thus obviating the necessity to model one's e-Portfolio according to the needs of a particular course.

The issues of transition or portability appear to be incapable of meeting any satisfactory conclusion and thus the student is tempted to give up and accept that the e-Portfolio is owned by an institution. This inevitably means that as the learner moves on to another institution yet another different e-Portfolio tool may be required with repeated uploading of artefacts. The owner is therefore tempted not to invest any additional time or effort beyond the minimum required. Perhaps one of my main arguments about the ownership of eFolio is the very fact that through the provision of templates and the facility to change 'skins' and fonts etc not only the younger learner but all learners can create an environment that expresses 'This is ME' – that the learner is proud of and wishes to retain.

If HE has troubles concerning vision, if FE has troubles relating to staff training then Mainstream Education suffers from both of these and more. As much as teachers may expect autonomy within the classroom there is still a need for central advice and direction. For the last four years BECTA has been miserably silent on the issue of e-Portfolios and has utterly failed to provide the leadership and inspiration required for a national initiative. At the same time there is a growing demand from the 'Is it free?' brigade who seem to be unaware of the failure of basic DIY e-Portfolios to meet the strict requirements of e-safe management that schools are required to maintain. It is therefore time for some serious 2G thinking.

I can do no better than to refer back to my original criteria, my 'Ten Prime Directives'. But perhaps I can address these in a different order.

'Cosmeticisation' – an ugly word but essential. Users of any age, from the youngest to the oldest, from the most able to the least able all should be able to modify the templates, style, fonts and images which make up their own chosen self-representation. Note that there is a difference between this and 'personalisation' which, for me, suggests the functionality of the software to recognise one's personal learning styles and preferred software, including such t hings as diagnostic and predictive tools.

Lifelong Learning: can only really be an option if the one e-Portfolio can use the above options to 'transmogrify' or change according to one's maturity, culture, social perspective, course of study or even one's favourite football team or current pop-group. It should be capable of changing the organisation and naming of pages and the addition, editing or removal of artefacts.

'Lifewide' has two distinct meanings. It can refer to the range of users, ie the one tool should be capable of being used by a number of different abilities within one class or group. However, it more significantly refers to the fact that any one person has a number of different personas, any one of which the learner may wish to present to a specific audience. For example, I may wish to represent myself to one group as a competent technician, to another as an HR manager and yet to a third as an environmentalist wishing to do work for a charitable organisation.

Portability is an essential function if the e-Portfolio is to have any credibility as a lifelong tool. However, most e-Portfolio solutions are institutionally based and repeatedly I have heard tales of frustration that the work a student has done in college on their e-Portfolio cannot be taken with them to their next institution or place of employment. This has often led to older students doing as little as necessary or responding with exclamations such as 'Why should I bother?' However, portability is an essential feature of 'transition' and, from my own experience, can include many movements from one school to another and on to yet another.

Do you own a Rolls Royce?

It's no good having a Rolls Royce, the latest high-performance Jaguar or a Lamborghini parked outside your house if there is no one to exploit its real potential or for its passengers to gain a wonderful enjoyment of the experience.


So, too, with all the recent innovations that we are presently experiencing in schools. For some schools the Interactive Whiteboard (IWB) is such a 'white elephant' where, despite the 'oos' and 'ahs' of the visitors the actual passengers (the pupils) do not rate the experience and the driver (the teacher) has hardly gained a licence to drive the IWB! In fact, some schools are disposing of their IWBs, generally due to the lack of confidence of the driver to actually get in and try the 'brute' out. Rather than being so frustrated, I would suggest that more teachers should actually get into the driving seat of their IWB, VLE or e-Portfolio and actually begin to enjoy the experience.

I'm presently writing this post at lunchtime at the ORT International VLE Seminar week - which also happens to be an opportunity for this international audience to visit BETT. I was priveledged to present a keynote presentation on 'VLEs - Evolution or Revolution?'. The reason for mentioning this is that I have been very impressed by the clarity of thought concerning VLEs in schools. If a country like Argentina can produce really creative resources by all of its teachers then perhaps teachers in the UK had better look out. Their attitude to sharing work through Creative Commons is far more productive than the protectionist IP lobby that some feel obliged to follow.

But I really must get back to the theme of e-Portfolios and ask that we start to share good practice and, like the Argentinians, begin to develop a more creative and exciting learning environment for all our students, staff and institutions included!

A New Year - but Old Mantras?

The ‘New Year’ is a time when we invariably look forward to new initiatives, a fresh start or a promise to follow New Year’s Resolutions. However, recent proclamations appear to be promising ‘more of the same’ – is this really all we can expect?  Are we really being encouraged to 'throw out the baby with the bathwater' all because of a few 'bad apples'?

Our friendly Welsh essayist, Graham Attwell, is in fighting spirit for his socio-political vision when he states:

“If Open Education is to mean anything, it has to address the question of social divisions including class, gender and race. I am unconvinced this can be done from inside the existing educational institutions, although of course it will need the support of those working in those organisations. Instead I think we need to use the power of the Internet to provide opportunities for education and learning outside the present system and to embed those learning activities in wider communities than the present institutions address.” See:

http://www.pontydysgu.org/2010/01/a-radical-definition-of-open-education/

Tony Bates flags up another essay on college costs in an article by Michael Bassis,

Again, another eloquent essay in which subtle misrepresentations are embedded in otherwise constructive thinking:

“Let's return to the case of online learning. This design began as an inexpensive way to deliver the standard curriculum. While it did provide increased access to many students, it was widely regarded as inferior to traditional degrees delivered by faculty in the classroom. But online learning is proving to be a classic example of a disruptive technology.”

See: http://www.businessweek.com/bschools/content/dec2009/bs20091221_519869.htm  .

I don’t know from which planet Michael Bassis originates or how old he is, but surely, some 30 years ago we were already exploring how Learning Platforms could support ‘anytime access’ and how this steadily evolved into some of the exciting VLE deliveries at local, national and international scales. Nothing to do with ‘inexpensive’ and certainly not ‘disruptive’.

Alongside developments in educational thinking, of recognising 10 Multiple Intelligences, of discovering the benefits of collaborative learning even with the 4 walls of a conventional classroom, of the acceptance of an increasing diversity within our classrooms and a recognition of the implications of increased family mobility it is no surprise that online learning has come of age. The relevant technologies are certainly NOT ‘disruptive’ but rather ‘supportive’ of educational thinking.

Again, sadly, Jon Mott and David Wiley in an extensive article fail to recognise the root cause of the problem in their paper:

http://ineducation.ca/article/open-learning-cms-and-open-learning-network  they state:

“Alternatively labeled learning management systems (LMSs), learning content management systems (LCMSs), and virtual learning environments (VLEs), such software has generally been focused primarily on helping teachers increase the efficiency of the administrative tasks of instruction (e.g., distribute documents, make assignments, give quizzes, initiate discussion boards, assign students to working groups, etc.). This instructor-centrism comes despite the best intentions and efforts of system designers, early adopters, and instructional support staff who sought to use these systems to transform the dominant learning modality of higher education from traditional, classroom-based instruction to online and hybrid courses. In practice, the vast majority of instructors who adopted the CMS largely ignored Bloom's challenge to make an "educational contribution of the greatest magnitude," instead focusing on increasing the administrative efficiency of their jobs.”

In my opinion all of the writers have failed to appreciate the root cause: it is not a failure of the technologies but, rather, a failure of some educators to move with the times, to take on board new teaching and learning styles and to appreciate how modern technologies can dramatically assist these strategies. As a practising technologist for over 50 years, I would suggest that just jumping to yet another isolate technology as the solution to all our problems will solve nothing.

As this new year dawns, let’s stop laughing at those tutors who still use the IWB as if it were no more than an OHP, let’s stop taking inward gasps of dismay when we see students actually printing out their essays for marking, let’s stop procuring content for a CMS on a ‘take-it-or-leave-it’ basis but rather, ask the Senior Leadership Teams why these things are still happening. Let’s ban the familiar setting of homework as ‘finish off your classwork notes’, let’s ban the use of pre-scripted activities that have no sense of personalisation or topicality, let’s remove all ‘pigeon-holes’ or ‘duckets’ from our staff-rooms and begin to establish liberated teaching and learning norms which equally apply to all sectors of education.

'Transformative change' is not so much about the use of contemporary technology but rather about the mindset of the instructors – or even the assessment Boards.

Instead of the powerful voice of HE maintaining the didactic traditions of pre-Victorian England, perhaps it is the time to re-vitalise all sections of academia not by introducing low-cost technologies so much as enforcing rigorous Schemes of Work which recognise improved efficiencies of teaching and learning and the support that contemporary technologies can offer.

Although all of the above refers to CMS/LMS/VLEs etc the arguments for e-Portfolios are similar:  Confusion and ignorance relating to the provenance of the e-Portfolio along with poor implemenations and even poorer teaching strategies are sufficient to encourage anyone thinking about e-Portfolios to drop the subject like a 'hot potato'.

Rather, as I have said frequently, 'Let the VLE do what it does best and allow the e-Portfolio to do what it can best do."

Passion and Learning

I have just come back from 3 days of HE/FE conferences in which I heard repeated criticisms of VLEs and e-Portfolios as not meeting the needs of students. Discussions ranged from the sterility of the formats to the inability of lecturers and professors to actually understand the potential of the new technologies.

And then, next morning, I discovered this offering from Angela Maiers' presentation for K12OnlineConference09. What a refreshing change this was! This raised my spirits for the simple reason that this is what I see as the secret of eFolio. The reality of real involvement as opposed to the half-hearted efforts of our kids in the classroom that Angela refers to is at the heart of the child's ownership of learning.

As I said at one of the meetings, 'Unless all stakeholders are fully consulted before the implementation of a new technology (here talking about VLEs), unless the decision makers are educated as to the full potential of the new tools, unless they can then in turn decide how this will impact on teaching and learning, it is no wonder that the technology fails to meet expectations.'

And this is equally true of e-Portfolios. In all sectors of Education, it would appear, decision makers have failed to do the spadework of consulting with the whole range of stakeholders - and certainly do not appear to have explored how the e-Portfolio can change teaching and learning. Far too often it is the case that installations are managed by technicians who have little understanding of the future direction of education. It is essential, as Angela Maier clearly illustrates, that unless the e-Portfolio is designed (by educators) to adapt to the learner's individual passions there will be very little chance of its real takeup within education.

Instructional Technology in Schools

"The Use of Instructional Technology in Schools examines teachers' use of the major instructional technologies over the last century — from the days of silent film, radio and slide shows through to the modern interactive whiteboard and the Web. It explores the reasons why so few teachers have used these technologies and why, even in today's digital world, the most commonly used classroom tools are the pen, paper and teaching board."

I make no apology for including this 'advert' as I helped in some of the discussions with Mal Lee about the evolving use of technologies in the UK. However, I have just been informed by Eurospan Limited, the UK branch of ACER Press, that they are offering a 15% discount on Mal Lee's books to educationists. The 'blurb' goes on to say:

"The book provides decision makers with an invaluable insight into the million dollar question: What is required to get all teachers across the nation using the appropriate instructional technology as a normal part of everyday teaching? Without question, student learning is enhanced by adopting these new technologies.

"Until now, research on why the majority of teachers use only the most basic tools in the classroom has been scarce. The Use of Instructional Technology in Schools examines this phenomenon and, most importantly, identifies what is required to achieve teachers' universal acceptance of instructional technologies."

About the authors
Mal Lee is an educational consultant specialising in the development of digital technology in schools. He is a former director of schools and secondary school principal, who has written extensively on the effective use of ICT in teaching practice. Mal Lee is co-author of Leading a Digital School: Principles and practice (ACER Press, 2008) and The Interactive Whiteboard Revolution: Teaching with IWBs (ACER Press, 2009).

Arthur Winzenried has taught in a wide variety of library and classroom settings, from primary to tertiary, and has been responsible for innovative developments in school ICT over a number of years. He is a frequent national and international speaker on knowledge management and is currently Lecturer in Information Systems at Charles Sturt University, NSW, Australia.

Issues Encountered by Distance Educators

Recurring Issues Encountered by Distance Educators in Developing and Emerging Nations is the full title of a very helpful article (first pointed out by Tony Bates) from the noble body entitled, The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning.

I must commend the willingness of authors to publish these articles for open access. There is a whole range of mandatory reading with which I must certainly catch up.

The abstract to the article, The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning reads:

"This article explores a number of challenges faced by e-learning or distance educators in developing and emerging countries, provides a context for many of the challenges, and outlines some measures devised to overcome them. These educators must determine a sound rationale for employing online learning, recognize that technology is only part of the educational transformation process, address the lack of infrastructure and the cost of Internet bandwidth and equipment, counter the cultural imperialism of courseware from Western nations, deal with limited educational resources, place a greater emphasis on quality assurance systems and change negative perceptions of distance education, respond to the needs and concerns of both students and faculty, access or develop up-to-date educational resources, and consider the implementation of mobile learning. The continued growth and success of distance education in developing and emerging nations will depend on the extent to which issues covered in this article are addressed as they bear on the quality of the learning experience provided to students. "

Perhaps a further note of caution need to be defined in terms of the actual Teaching and Learning culture. Perhaps where good VLEs have not yet been established, the place of the e-Portfolio becomes even more important. And yet the very climate in the classroom may still be that of "I teach, You listen." Yes, the e-Portfolio can be a good record of a student's learning, of their competencies and interests, all of which can be part of a traditional didactic approach. However, the e-Portfolio also lends itself to collaboration and peer review which might still be beyond the experience of some teachers and lecturers.

Although 'collaboration' is mentioned several times in the paper, it is in terms of institutions' collaborative efforts related to generally economic pressures. It is therefore time that, in such organisations, teachers and lecturers re-defined their curricula in order to build upon those beneficial processes of collaboration and peer review, sharing with mentors and building upon regular formative feedback from tutors. And this, of course is where the e-Portfolio is best able to support Teaching & Learning.

Where does Learning take place?

Adults, or certainly those in Higher Education, may be free to do their learning when and where and from whom they like. However, the same is not equally true for those younger students or even adults who need some guidance.

Bob Harrison recently quoted on a NAACE forum the following from 'The Impact of ICT in schools-a landscape review-Becta 2007' :

'While this study has looked closely at the impact of ICT on how pupils learn and how this might be enhanced....it has not addressed the impact of what they learn or where learning takes place and whether the schools of the future will be the physical entities we have today.'

Some two years later we still do not have clear answers and probably there will not ever be one set of answers which will suit everyone. However, building upon Mal Lee's graphic of the 'Home-School Nexus' (highlighted in the above diagram in blue) and looking further to Networked School Communities, I have tried to identify most of the major influences affecting any young learner. The nature of 'Virtual Learning' and how this might impact on current school practice and 'physical entities' will be explored more in my next post.

What young people learn has been the centre of discussions and the culture of a digitally aware society has begun to impact on curriculum design in most of our schools. Whether examination boards are ready to develop new ways of assessing learning is another question altogether.

How young people learn in a digital age is still not well-defined. Despite the fact that many schools may have an abundance of digital appliances, schools may still have a large proportion of teachers who believe in the "I teach, you listen" philosophy. The problem with this is that where children attend such a mixed-strategy school, it is doubtful that either system can be successful. And, again, despite a tacit recognition of the theory of Multiple Intelligences, it is often the case that lesson after lesson the children only experience one form of teaching and learning.

When and where young people learn has been the subject of much discussion and in some cases a serious indictment of our academic culture. We tend to expect children to learn only in lesson time and do not appreciate the vast amount of 'out-of-school' time which can be rich with experience and capable of much reflection and collaboration with others outside of the immediate home-school environment. Although the following graphic might raise some questions about the quality of the research relating to students in Holland, again, it raises questions about whether tapping into the power of modern media is recognised by schools as having any real merit.

from: CISCO Equipping_Every_Learner_for_21st_Century_White_Paper.pdf

The question is, do these figures represent total media usage by students in your country or is Holland different to other countries?